Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Auro 11.1 - Its Rollout & Marketing

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » Auro 11.1 - Its Rollout & Marketing (Page 5)

This topic comprises 11 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Author

Topic: Auro 11.1 - Its Rollout & Marketing

Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012

posted 01-31-2014 03:34 PM

Gord, you are right the CP500 was a factor in the success however quad format release prints eliminated the need for a DTS/SDDS or Dolby Digital unit in the same complex or same theatre. If you were building a new complex it made almost no sense to not go with the CP500. If wasn't for quad format releases, you would still need a DTS unit regardless if you had the CP500 or not.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 01-31-2014 03:40 PM

quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
The CP500 is not what allowed Dolby to win with the 35mm discrete digital wars.

I didn't say the CP500 helped Dolby "win" the digital sound wars. I didn't say anyone "won" the supposed format war (see the term "stalemate" above). I said the CP500 allowed Dolby Digital to overtake DTS in installation numbers.

Quad format prints didn't mean anything in terms of Dolby Digital. Whenever two or more formats were present on a film print 99.9% of the time Dolby Digital was one of those two. In the cases where a 35mm print had only one digital sound format that format was more often Dolby Digital than DTS or SDDS. Dolby Digital had the lead from the get go in terms of movie title support.

What Dolby Digital didn't have was a cost advantage. The original DA-10 setup cost around $20,000. The DA-20 cut that cost in half, which made it cheaper than SDDS, but still a few grand more than DTS' $5900 list price. Theaters were still installing DTS in big numbers even after quad format 35mm prints were coming out of more major studios.

Someone building a new theater could put DTS in every booth rack and save money over a Dolby DA-20. But a good 6-channel cinema processor was still needed. That's a few thousand dollars more. The Dolby CP500 effectively eliminated DTS' cost advantage. Add to this the stadium seated theater building boom that was already underway. The CP500 moved lots and lots of units. DTS responded with its DTS-6AD, but it didn't have nearly the level of popularity as the CP500.

quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
If wasn't for quad format releases, you would still need a DTS unit regardless if you had the CP500 or not.

Not all the major studios were doing quad format in 1997 when the CP500 was introduced. Universal didn't start releasing quad format prints until January of 1998.

| IP: Logged

Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012

posted 01-31-2014 03:44 PM

Bobby, Dolby Digital was the clearly won the format 35mm digital format war.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 01-31-2014 04:15 PM

Not really. In order for Dolby Digital to have "won the war" on 35mm, studio support for the "losers" (DTS and SDDS) would have had to vanish once Dolby was declared the victor. The truth is even with Dolby Digital building up huge installation numbers, DTS still had a giant sized installation base of its own -far too big for major studios to abandon. Major studios still continued to support creation of SDDS tracks even after Sony stopped supporting its own SDDS hardware. Again, enough theaters had SDDS to make it worthy of support from at least some major studios. Even with very few 35mm-based theaters remaining there are still some places playing movies in DTS (now Datasat actually).

Uncompressed Linear PCM is by far the dominant sound format in d-cinema. Yet the logos for lossy Dolby Digital, Datasat and even SDDS are still seen on the end credits of most major studio movie releases. Those logos still manage to get on a few movie posters too. No mention of LPCM is ever made in the advertising even though it is better.

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1400
From: Davie, FL, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 01-31-2014 07:40 PM

What's funny about the CP500 "all in one" processor is that there literally was a DA-20 inside of it. It just eliminated the cables.

The only difference was the D/A converters were replaced with bit rate converters. Why the CP500 wasn't designed to have the same bit rate as the DA-20 I have no idea.

To see the error rate you had to open the front panel and view the LED. You couldn't display it on the front LCD screen.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-01-2014 12:38 PM

Obviously Dolby solved that problem with the CP650.

quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
Bobby, Dolby Digital was the clearly won the format 35mm digital format war.

I'm so glad the editing time limit expired, allowing this baffling phrase to become permanent. I think whoever came up with "I Can Has Cheeseburger" might be proud.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 02-01-2014 01:08 PM

I'm still seeing DTS/Datasat and Dolby Digital logos on movies, but I am noticing less of them having SDDS. And I'm certain that's because of AMC being almost exclusively digital and having gotten rid of all the SDDS stuff.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-01-2014 05:45 PM

SDDS has been the odd format out on releases from certain studios for a long time. Fox started reducing its support for SDDS tracks on its releases back in the early 2000's. Still, studios like Warner Bros., Universal and Columbia/Tri-Star (Sony) keep striking quad format prints.

I'm not sure what theaters would be running SDDS hardware these days. One guess would be smaller theaters that bought used SDDS gear. I imagine there are stacks of SDDS processors and readers just gathering dust. It's another question of whether that equipment put into mothballs actually works.

At least with Dolby Digital and DTS there's still recent year model equipment available to play the audio tracks. The last SDDS hardware was made around 2002 (I think).

With SDDS being a dead format that still marches on like a zombie, that gets back to the topic of Auro. The odds for Auro beating Dolby Atmos are very slim, but if Auro gets a large enough installation base in theaters the major studios will be more inclined to author Auro 11.1 mixes.

| IP: Logged

Terry Lynn-Stevens
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1081
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Registered: Dec 2012

posted 02-01-2014 06:31 PM

quote: Chris Slycord
I'm still seeing DTS/Datasat and Dolby Digital logos on movies, but I am noticing less of them having SDDS.

SDDS is still advertised on some movie credits. Even some of the more recent posters have SDDS on the poster, I don't see why a studio would not want to offer SDDS for some of the bigger budget titles as I am sure there are some locations that are still using SDDS.

quote: Chris Slycord
And I'm certain that's because of AMC being almost exclusively digital and having gotten rid of all the SDDS stuff.

That is possible, but AMC still does have 35mm locations.

quote: Carsten Kurz
Germany has a single Auro 3D installation, and about 10 Atmos installations.

We'll see how well Atmos does, but I doubt it will have much an impact at all long term from what I have seen. Sure it might become the standard but I am pretty confident that Atmos will be reserved for large big budget titles (Hobbit, Gravity or Man of Steel) only and I still think they need to get their cinemas to advertise the format correctly, I recently saw Lone Survivor, Wolf of Wall Street and even Jack Ryan in Atmos, or did I?

I have heard rumors that IMAX will jump into the object based sound area and it will be a proprietary 12.1 layout that will accompany any laser projection upgrades. If IMAX gets involved and brings out a 12.1 type format, I can see their system gaining more acceptance and relevance. IMAX is more popular with moviegoers right now.

Auro is going nowhere.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 02-01-2014 08:33 PM

Auro is going nowhere.

So is IMAX.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 02-02-2014 03:20 AM

quote: Terry Lynn-Stevens
That is possible, but AMC still does have 35mm locations.

1) I worked at an all SDDS AMC. Well, all SDDS except the two digital houses at the time (remaining 28 were 35mm). And prior to it converting to digital, the tech swapped in a few houses of Dolby penthouse readers from converted houses elsewhere. At the time, I presumed he did this because he didn't like dealing with SDDS since it wasn't supported one bit. It's since converted to all-digital.
2) Given the number of houses that AMC converted, I assume that they were able to find enough non-SDDS units to cover all the remaining 35mm-only locations. It'd be stupid of them not to do it.
3) Heck, the only local AMC I know of that's still 35mm is an acquisition from another chain that rarely used SDDS.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-05-2014 02:47 AM

Hmm, it's the 90s all over again.

Spider-Man 2 Declares Truce in Sound Format War

Thu, 01/30/2014 - 15:16 -- Nick Dager

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is being mixed in both Barco Auro 11.1 and Dolby Atmos cinema sound.Spidey has decided to call a truce in the cinema sound format war. Sony Pictures Entertainment is teaming with Dolby and Barco to mix The Amazing Spider-Man 2 in both Auro 11.1 and Dolby Atmos cinema sound. The movie will be released in theaters internationally beginning April 16 and domestically on May 2. The move will no doubt increase the number of movie theatres available to show the movie.

The studio has also converted its landmark William Holden Theater to support both technologies for mixing. The studio teamed with both Dolby and Barco to install a 56-speaker system and related equipment that is capable of mixing and playing both formats and has 4K digital projection and 3D capabilities.

Rory Bruer, president of Worldwide Distribution for Sony Pictures said, “We’re thrilled to be working with Barco and Dolby, both to convert the William Holden Theater and to incorporate these innovative technologies into The Amazing Spider-Man 2. We are always looking for ways to offer greater definition and further enhance the moviegoing experience. These technologies are one more way that we offer consumers a richer and unique theatrical experience.”

Paul Massey and David Giammarco will be creating both the Dolby Atmos and Auro 11.1 mixes. Commenting on the announcement, they said: "We are thrilled to have these groundbreaking formats available for audiences viewing The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Both Atmos and Auro will allow us the creative freedom to fully immerse the audience with 3D sound as Marc Webb's vision of Spider-Man's world unfolds. Every member of the audience will experience what it's like to be Spider-Man swinging from building to building above a busy New York street!"

“Barco has channeled our industry-leading cinema technologies into an immersive audio solution that provides uniquely significant benefits to studios and exhibitors around the world,” comments Brian Claypool, senior director of strategic business development for Barco Entertainment. “We are deeply honored to have this opportunity to work with Sony Pictures and by empowering film makers with the perfect rendering environment that integrates seamlessly with their existing workflows, we can help them easily and cost-effectively deliver the most realistic, natural and comfortable immersive listening experience to bring their movies to life.”

“Dolby Atmos, the world’s first and only object-based cinema sound platform available today, marked a giant step forward in the evolution of movie storytelling. We are proud to have pioneered an approach to sound that delivers a sense of being in the moment alongside your favorite characters," said Doug Darrow, senior vice president, cinema, Dolby Laboratories. "We have successfully deployed Dolby Atmos in hundreds of cinemas around the globe, and dozens of the world's leading filmmakers embrace our new approach to sound.”

[URL= http://digitalcinemareport.com/article/spider-man-2-declares-truce-sound-format-war#.Uu_NlXddWtl]Digital Cinema Report article[/URL]

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-05-2014 08:27 AM

The Amazing Spiderman 2 won't be the first movie featuring a mix in both Dolby Atmos and Barco/Auro 11.1. Several movie releases have already done that. Actually, most movies that have been released with Auro 11.1 have also featured Dolby Atmos.

Rise of the Guardians, Fox, 11-21-2012
Oz the Great and Powerful, Disney, 3-8-2013
The Croods, Dreamworks, 3-22-2013
Turbo, Dreamworks, 7-17-2013
Elysium, Columbia, 8-9-2013
Ender's Game, Summit Entertainment, 11-1-2013
I, Frankenstein, Lionsgate, 1-24-2014

Coming Soon
Mr. Peabody & Sherman, Dreamworks, 3-7-2014
The Amazing Spiderman 2, Sony, 5-2-2014

There's probably quite a few more titles that will be added to the list as the Summer season gets closer.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-05-2014 09:59 AM

I know, but didn't some of those other movies (or all of them) go through some sort of "conversion" to arrive at one of the soundtracks? I think the point they're making is that this movie is being specifically mixed both ways.

Or were all the ones you mentioned done that way?

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-05-2014 11:01 AM

Dolby Atmos and Auro 11.1 both require specific mixes, at least to get any results that are worth a damn. The two formats are very different in regard to speaker arrangement as well as how the audio is encoded.

It's possible for someone to mix a movie in either 5.1 or 7.1 and then merely port that mix into Atmos or Auro format where it's nothing more than a plain 5.1 or 7.1 mix carrying a more fancy brand label.

Auro's "base" layer is essentially a straight 5.1 or 7.1 audio mix. It takes considerable, deliberate effort to pull elements in the sound mix up into Auro's height and ceiling speaker layers.

Dolby Atmos supports channel-based "beds" in addition to discrete sound objects. For some audio effects it's better to create a down-mixed stem as an audio bed that can be spread across an entire array of speakers as opposed to having the sound come out of only one speaker in a specific array. A good Atmos mix may have a bottom layer of audio as a bed and then have numerous audio objects floated above it. A more complex mix can be built faster in that manner than using nothing but independent objects.

Unfortunately the audio bed capability in Atmos can allow some movies to cheat and basically be an Atmos mix in name only. You could literally paste a 5.1 layout into the Atmos environment and output it as an "Atmos mix" as is. I didn't hear very much in Man of Steel or Thor: The Dark World to make me believe the sound mixers did much with Atmos at all. Both mixes sounded barely any different than a standard 5.1 mix.

When the sound editing/mixing crew goes to the extra effort of really utilizing these new sound formats then they can impress. I haven't watched a movie in an Auro 11.1 equipped theater yet. But I have heard Dolby Atmos used very well, particularly the mix for Gravity.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 11 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.